ulterno

Having a language that guards against that is just one more level of safety, and that’s a good thing.

Yes it is.
But my point simply is, "caring" about stuff needs to be normalised, instead of over-anti-pedantism and answering concerns with stuff like, "chill dude!".
We know very well that not all bugs are memory related.

, that the world would need. Or the industry adopts Rust (or a similar language) and have lot of security by default for free

I can see you didn't care to understand the example I gave. Rust wouldn't have fixed the problem that happened in my bubble.

I can also see, you somehow think I am against Rust, just because I am for people caring about what they write.

are questioning reports from Google

No. I am interpreting the single number 52%, that came out of the report from Google, without caring about the meaning about the metric.
And that's what is causing you to not like what I wrote.
It's almost as if it is important to care about the context of what you are writing into. See what I did there?

motivated reasoning

Interesting word.

I don't have evidence against either and am just speculating.

My motivation is: people should use their brain more

It does not matter how much you teach

That's 100% correct.
Those that don't care, will still not care.

Sure, I won't go around saying, "I don't make said mistakes". I too, tend to leave the destructors to be written later.
But that doesn't mean one can go on ignoring ignorance.

In my last project I had some database CRUD operations. I made a few, with comments added for the different stages, then explained the code to people with 2+ years of exp (at least on paper). They then went on to make the other functions using mine as a reference.

There were no memory safety issues in that, as there was no room for it. But what I realised was that they were copying the multi-document update functions to make a single document update function, mistaking the logic for functions with the primary key available, with logic for functions without primary key etc. Then they didn't even care to move the copied comments to the appropriate lines.
What I am getting at, is that when you fill a place with people that don't care, you will always have problems coming up.

We are humans. We are fallible. We make mistakes.

And that's why we make sure to double check our work.

Even in C++, most of the times, we are using logically managed containers. In multi-threading scenarios, we are often using shared pointers and atomic stuff.
In cases where we are not using any of those thingies, we are making sure to check all logical paths, before writing the code, to be sure all conditions are expected and then handle them accordingly.

Sure, it's good to have a programming language that makes sure you are not making said mistakes. And then you can keep your mind on the business logic.
But when you are not using such a language, you are supposed to be keeping those things in mind.

So you will need to add to that: "We are lazy. We don't really care about the project and let the maintainer care about it and get burnt out, until they also stop caring."

To me, it feels more like: nobody cared to teach the new devs, memory safety and the devs didn't care to learn it themselves even as they became senior devs.
Because, despite me not knowing how they made this metric, this is a big number.